Re: License Choice
- From: Timo Schneider <timo.schneider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 05:05:04 +0000 (UTC)
On 2005-11-29, hutch-- <hutch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Freeware respects the right of ownership where GPL takes ownership of
> your code if you want to distribute it. The gripe I have with the form
> of the GPL licence is the attempt at TERM REDEFINITION in its preamble
> to hide or confuse the real situation of who owns the code once it is
> distributed.
What do you mean by that? I understood: "You can't change the licence /
don't "own" the code anymore once it is distributed."
I think this is wrong because you always keep the right to change the
licence. But there are problems if other poeple have also contributed to
your work, you would have to ask them if they also want to change the
licence.
That's why Linus Torvalds can't sell the Linux Kernel, even if he wanted
to, he would have to ask hundrets of hackers all over the world if the
would agree with it. I don't know what happens if some of them died in
the meantime.
Keep in mind that copyright laws are quite different in each country. I
only know the situation in Germany.
IANAL.
Regards,
Timo
.
- References:
- License Choice
- From: Bal Oney
- Re: License Choice
- From: hutch--
- License Choice
- Prev by Date: Re: how to ADD 32 to a signed number without using ADD only AND and OR
- Next by Date: Re: Why there are so many assemblers.
- Previous by thread: Re: License Choice
- Next by thread: Re: License Choice
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
